« on: June 25, 2012, 09:11:00 PM »
Viggo, you triggered the comparison I wanted to make. No sane person would argue that the 50L lens is not better in bokeh and color rendition than the 50 f/1.4. Afterall, I have the 50L and even stopped down, the colors are very good. Having said that though, let's look at SHARPNESS ONLY. And let's look at 3 focal lengths. For the 35L, it is sharper at f/8 than the 35 f/2. Okay, so the 35L is a better overall lens. Now, let's look at the 85L. The 85L is sharper than the 85 f/1.8 at f/8. Again, the 85L is a better lens overall. That leaves the 50L. The 50L is NOT sharper than the 50 f/1.4 at f/8, in fact, the 1.4 is sharper. See Bryan Carnathan's Tools/Tests if you don't believe me. This is why the 50L leaves a lot to be desired. For maximum sharpness across all apertures, I have to have two 50mm prime lenses, in effect, and that is not so for the 35 and 85mm focal lengths. Would I get rid of my 50L? No. I like it wider than f/2.2. It's a very, very good night lens too for street shots. I like the saturation too. But again, my comparison was center sharpness, which does matter too.
If I were shooting weddings, I would NOT purchase this lens just because I was shooting weddings. Shoot your shots with the 50L, 50 1.4, load 'em onto your computer and compare. You'll see no difference at all in IQ at f/2.8 and narrower, which is where I spend all of my time even in wedding photography. So what would be the point in spending $1499 vs. $369? If you want the awesome bokeh effects for elsewhere outside of weddings, then yes it is worth it.